Roy Williams = Overrated?

[jaxmagicman]

If Donovan Darius could get healthy he could run circles around Williams.

[andymac]

I think that Mike Brown neeeds to be thrown into the discussion if we are talking about top safeties in the league. I also think that it is basically impossible for anyone who doesn't have the coaches game film of each team and have spent a significant amount of time viewing them to have much of an informed opinion when it comes to defensive players (other than that guy is pretty good type of analysis).

[Vris]

If Rodney Harrison wasn't out for the year, you would've included him as well.

[matskralc]

Originally Posted by andymac

I think that Mike Brown neeeds to be thrown into the discussion if we are talking about top safeties in the league. I also think that it is basically impossible for anyone who doesn't have the coaches game film of each team and have spent a significant amount of time viewing them to have much of an informed opinion when it comes to defensive players (other than that guy is pretty good type of analysis).

Especially players in the secondary, since you never see them on camera until the end of the play, and that's only if the ball's thrown downfield. Maybe receivers are constantly getting open on Williams, but do we know why? Is he being brought up a few steps in run support? Is he getting stuck trying to keep an eye on Anthony Henry's man at the same time? Is it, as I and Aordolin mentioned earlier, that he's getting left in one-on-one coverage against receivers because of the Cowboys' tendency to blitz, and just about every safety would get burned in those situations? Or is it bad luck? Maybe Williams is a blanket 99% of the time he's in coverage, but the occasional times he gets burned happen to be burns of the third degree? Is Dallas's defensive line so bad that they create no pressure on the quarterback, who is freer to make more "tough" throws than other quarterbacks make, and those throws go up against Williams?

So anyway, yeah, it's pretty much impossible for any of us to really have an informed opinion.

[Mark Guest]

In terms of coverage, yes he is over rated. He is a terrible cover safety. However, against the run he may be the best in the league, as well as being a terrific blitzing safety. Much of his "rating" comes from his days at Oklahoma and of course being a Cowboy, but there are few game changers in the NFL on defense and Roy happens to be one of them.

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by matskralc

So anyway, yeah, it's pretty much impossible for any of us to really have an informed opinion.

I disagree. I watch defensive players most often when I'm watching football. I could tell you how a cover-1, 2, 3, and 5 work and where everyone should be on each type of play under each type of scheme. I could explain a zone blitz and I could map all assignments for all players in each combination of man-zone. I think a lot of fans could do the same thing--anyone who has played defense in college football, for example. Fans with that base of knowledge have a pretty informed opinion of watching a defensive player play. There are very few schemes even in the NFL that aren't easily recognizeable.

The thing about Roy Williams is that he is out of position a ton. He's a gambler/cheater. And he's a slapdick in coverage. He's very good at engaging blocks for his size, but more athletic safeties can often get by without engaging some of the ones he is forced to engage. He's a good run-stuffer, but he's not around the LOS enough for me to call him superb at that either.

Roy Williams makes most of his plays far away from the LOS. So you end up with a guy who can't cover, who is supposed to be a run-stopping safety who takes gambles to that effect but makes most of his plays against the run well away from the LOS, and who isn't athletic. That last point is what betrays him.

What exactly does Roy Williams do well besides blitz?

[Dagrims]

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

And he's a slapdick in coverage.

I was with you on everything you said before and after this comment. I'm lost on this one, however.

[marc]

Originally Posted by spleen1015

Aren't all Cowboys overrated?

Yes.

[BrewedCrew]

Didnt you see that bobble catch he made for the TD Roy Williams is good but is on the wrong team.

o wait are we talking about the dallas guy?

[Teddyballgame]

I don't think the point is "You don't know anything about football". I think the issue at hand is: How much can we really evaluate watching the t.v. coverage of an NFL game? We're only seeing select action of the game and what's happening on the field. How much of, say, Roy Williams game are we actually seeing? Can we accurately rate him based off whatever percentage that may be? I agree with Mats and Andy, I don't think you can get an accurate view of any one player through that method. Unless you're watching game tapes that the coaches have, then I think you're limited too speculation with limited basis on reality. (I.E., what you see on the tube)

[sebastian0622]

You can watch a player a whole lot more on TV than you're thinking, IMO. Next time you're watching a game, pick a defensive player. On each play, decide that you're going to see what he did. Almost all of the time, you'll be able to see the entirety of his action (especially for players who play closer to the LOS). At the very least, you'll be able to see both where he lines up and where he ends up after the play. From there, you can get a pretty good idea of what he did in the 3-6 seconds in between.

With replays, I'm able to see the entirety of a defensive player's action nearly every play. I think part of that may be that I instinctually know where to look for each player in each scheme, so I kind of expect where a certain guy should be, and then it's a lot easier to reconcile that with where he actually is than it would be to try to read 11 numbers every play in 4 seconds of live action.

[Dwolfson20]

Originally Posted by sebastian0622

You can watch a player a whole lot more on TV than you're thinking, IMO. Next time you're watching a game, pick a defensive player. On each play, decide that you're going to see what he did. Almost all of the time, you'll be able to see the entirety of his action (especially for players who play closer to the LOS). At the very least, you'll be able to see both where he lines up and where he ends up after the play. From there, you can get a pretty good idea of what he did in the 3-6 seconds in between.

With replays, I'm able to see the entirety of a defensive player's action nearly every play. I think part of that may be that I instinctually know where to look for each player in each scheme, so I kind of expect where a certain guy should be, and then it's a lot easier to reconcile that with where he actually is than it would be to try to read 11 numbers every play in 4 seconds of live action.

Hey, thanks for this post. You remind me of that NFL Films episode where they show all these schlubs in Tampa who applied for the Bucs GM job when it was open a few years ago, and they have all this silly crap on their resumes like assistant coaching Pop Warner football. Don't you live in Florida or something?

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by Dwolfson20

Hey, thanks for this post. You remind me of that NFL Films episode where they show all these schlubs in Tampa who applied for the Bucs GM job when it was open a few years ago, and they have all this silly crap on their resumes like assistant coaching Pop Warner football. Don't you live in Florida or something?

This post made me laugh, although it was probably intended to offend me.

Really man, just pick a defensive player next time you watch a game and follow him. Being able to do so doesn't mean I think I'm the next Bucs GM--it just means I have eyesight and a rudimentary understanding of the game. I figure you have at least one of those two, so you should fare ok in following a little dood around the TV screen, even if you don't know what his movements mean.

[Dwolfson20]

Originally Posted by Herman Edwards

This post made me laugh, although it was probably intended to offend me.

Really man, just pick a defensive player next time you watch a game and follow him. Being able to do so doesn't mean I think I'm the next Bucs GM--it just means I have eyesight and a rudimentary understanding of the game. I figure you have at least one of those two, so you should fare ok in following a little dood around the TV screen, even if you don't know what his movements mean.

Offend you? Ha, you sound like you've never been offended in your life. I hope you realize that it's impossible to accurately track the position of all the defenders on every play of a game, let alone all the games, so I'm not sure where you get off making these ridiculous statements with no basis in fact, and the ability to follow one player around is a far cry from anything you said.

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by Dwolfson20

Offend you? Ha, you sound like you've never been offended in your life. I hope you realize that it's impossible to accurately track the position of all the defenders on every play of a game, let alone all the games, so I'm not sure where you get off making these ridiculous statements with no basis in fact, and the ability to follow one player around is a far cry from anything you said.

No, I said I know where every position on the field should be under most schemes against different plays. That doesn't mean I can follow them all at once. I can, however, pick one player and see if he is consistently where he should be, and see how he gets there/doesn't get there (read, reaction, movement, shedding blocks, tackling, playing the ball, etc). None of this knowledge is difficult to obtain--a football theory/coaching 101 course at your local university with a coaching program will cover most of it, as would playing a defensive position at any post-HS level of competition.

So are you saying I don't know defensive schemes, or that I'm unable to watch Roy Williams, or what exactly are you saying?

[Dwolfson20]

Originally Posted by Jack Ham

No, I said I know where every position on the field should be under most schemes against different plays. That doesn't mean I can follow them all at once. I can, however, pick one player and see if he is consistently where he should be, and see how he gets there/doesn't get there (read, reaction, movement, shedding blocks, tackling, playing the ball, etc). None of this knowledge is difficult to obtain--a football theory/coaching 101 course at your local university with a coaching program will cover most of it, as would playing a defensive position at any post-HS level of competition.

So are you saying I don't know defensive schemes, or that I'm unable to watch Roy Williams, or what exactly are you saying?

I'm not saying anything anyone else hasn't said five times already, you just don't seem to want to address any of it. I'm saying you don't know NFL defensive schemes, and you can't know them from watching television, and if could you would likely be coaching serious football rather than attempting to coach football on a message board, not that it really matters what's possible and what's not.

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by Dwolfson20

I'm saying you don't know NFL defensive schemes, and you can't know them from watching television.

You're right; you can't know them from watching television, which is why I learned them from playing college football and from taking a football coaching class with a defensive coordinator and from running hours of game film.

Saying that "if you know schemes, you'd be coaching football" is stupid. That's like me saying if you understand vetoes, you should be the President. You really should take a coaching class and coach a team or nine if you want to talk about coaching like you know anything--coaching is about 8 thousand more things than knowing schemes. The schemes are ridiculously simple. You could learn in one hour the majority of the cover 2 that TB used primarily to win the SB, and you could probably find it on teh internets.

You're acting like I'm claiming some great knowledge because I understand where players should be in cover 1,2,3,5 and various man defenses. I'm not. If you knew any of that information, you'd probably realize how simple NFL schemes are. The difficulty of coaching defense in the NFL doesn't lie in knowing complicated schemes ("complicated schemes" is an oxy-moron--it's not possible to design complicated defensive plays in a sport when plays last five seconds). It lies in coaching players, training players, using personnel effectively in your packages, and running the right coverages at the right times against the right opponents.

But, just because I'm not an NFL coach doesn't mean that I can't notice things on the field. I may not have the talent to go out and coach a Super-Bowl winning defense, but I do have enough information to evaluate assignment football.

But, if it'll make you leave me alone, I'll tell you that I've been talking out of my ass the whole time. If that'll make you feel better. Otherwise, I see no motive for anything you've said to me other than trying to bring me down to--I guess--feel better about yourself.

[Dwolfson20]

Originally Posted by Art Shell

But, if it'll make you leave me alone, I'll tell you that I've been talking out of my ass the whole time.

Oh, sorry about that, didn't realize I wasn't supposed make any comments to you in a thread you started. I'll refrain from posting in threads that people start in the future!

[sebastian0622]

Originally Posted by Aordolin

Most safeties are going to get burned by a WR deep. If they could cover WRs they'd be playing CB.

That's a lot of what seperates Williams from the elite safeties in the league. You could also say that most CB's are going to get burned by a WR deep, and that would be a true statement. The ability for a safety to cover near the ability of a CB is what makes some guys like the aforementioned Reed so valuable.

Strong safeties are rarely matched up m2m against a WR, although it can happen (such as a base 7 cover two against a 4-WR set--but most defenses would be in a 3-3-5 or 4-2-5 nickel or a dime in that situation). Being able to cover for a safety doesn't mean a safety has to run with a WR. It just means he has to first identify the deepest and most "middle" threat and bracket that, stay as deep as the deepest on the outsides, then be able to react to the #1's and 2's on the outsides. Reed is a perfect example of a safety that can do that as well as any I've ever seen.

Given 5 seconds and a mis-match, the offense always has the advantage regardless of how many Ed Reeds the defense has. My observations say that Williams becomes a liability in coverage well before that point. He has an extremely difficult time playing deep third and reacting to the outsides. Add in that he over runs a lot of plays, and it can get ugly.

[Joshv02]

Seb: I don't know much about football, but I'm wondering why you think the Cowboy talent evaluators don't see what you see?